Undemocratic National Parks
0 
Dear Sirs
I was interested to hear David Cameron preaching democracy to the Chinese people today.
Perhaps he should preach it to the Scottish Government in the UK.
In the year 2009, eleven years after devolution in Scotland, the Scottish Parliament introduced a consultation document under the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 which continues to discriminate against those residing in the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs areas by proposing nothing that reduces a substantial amount of power from the elected local authorities and placing it in the hands of National Park Authorities (NPAs) which are non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) responsible to central government.
This proposal continues the anomaly that those residing within national park boundaries do not enjoy the same level of local democracy as elsewhere in the country, as the 17 NPA board members dominated by central government appointees and board member electees, "must work together with the purpose, as set out in the Act [section 9 (1)], of ensuring that the National Park aims are collectively achieved in relation to the National Park in a coordinated way".
The suggested political structure of NPA Boards is:
(a) 6 central government appointees.
(b) 6 further central government appointees nominated by local councils that have at least part of a ward within the national park boundaries.
The nominated members shall be nominated as follows;
• two members (including one local member) to be nominated by Argyll and Bute Council
• two members (including one local member) to be nominated by Stirling
Council
• one member nominated by West Dunbartonshire Council
• one member nominated by Perth & Kinross Council
These nominated board members are generally, but not necessarily, local councillors who have been elected on mainstream issues but who are required to represent their electorate differently, depending whether or not their voters reside within the national parks. They are also entitled to make decisions that affect constituencies in which they do not reside or represent.
(c) 5 board member electees who are solely concerned with national park issues. This is passed off as "democracy" but there is a world of a difference between electing local councilors on the wide political front and board members "electees" of quangos with a single-issue remit.
Under this proposal, planning applications will still be determined by board members who must work together to ensure that the national park aims are collectively achieved. Board members who are councilors elected on mainstream politics will require to make different decisions depending on whether their constituents do or do not reside within national park boundaries.
The question that no politician will answer is:
Why are those who live within the boundaries of national parks in Scotland not entitled to the same level of local democracy as elsewhere in the country?
The National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 is an act of discrimination against a minority of the population based on where they reside.
Go to Forum >>0 Comments